Advertisement

Interview with Senator Arlen Specter

By Hannity, Hannity - August 3, 2010

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

Watch the latest video at FoxNews.com

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," August 3, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: We begin with my interview with former Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter. Now the longtime Pennsylvania senator and I discussed a whole host of issues during our lengthy discussion. And some of it, well, it got pretty interesting.adsonar_placementId=1502157;adsonar_pid=150758;adsonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=198;adsonar_zh=170;adsonar_jv='ads.adsonar.com';

Now it's important to note that the senator contacted us to come on the show. And he wanted to do so in order to discuss his effort to get cameras inside the U.S. Supreme Court.

Now Senator Specter has championed the issue in an effort to promote more transparency in government. But we also made it clear to his staff that there were plenty of other things that we wanted to talk to him about. And they agreed.

The rest you need to see for yourself.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HANNITY: First, you want to put cameras in the courtroom which I think I might find myself in agreement with. You know, you're talking about the Supreme Court and every other court?

SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER, D-PENN.: No, I'm talking about the Supreme Court. Many state Supreme Courts are now televised as is the highest court in Great Britain and Canada.

I want the Supreme Court to be televised because they have such a tremendous impact on the lives of all citizens. If you're a newspaper reporter, you have an absolute right to be in the courtroom and to write your story.

And now since most of the information comes on television, seems to me a logical extension for people to understand.

HANNITY: Is there any danger that -- that people play up for the courts because they know they're on television and they act differently? Is that a concern?

SPECTER: Well, that is a concern. But the cameras are hidden. They do know they are being filmed. But I think that that mild disadvantage, potential disadvantage, is far outweighed by the value of having people understand what happens in a very important facet of the government.

HANNITY: Yes. Senator, I just have a hard time figuring you out. You're somebody that I've interviewed a lot over the years. I've disagreed with you quite a bit. But I can't figure out how you could go from supporting George W. Bush in some years, 89, 90 percent of the time, and then supporting Barack Obama 96 percent of the time.

Considering their principles, their core values, their belief system is so diametrically opposed. How do -- how do you justify that?

SPECTER: Well, those statistics are really --

HANNITY: Accurate.

SPECTER:  -- misleading. Well, I'm not challenging their accuracy. But we have a lot of routine matters where almost everybody votes the same way. When President Bush was in office, I disagreed with him on many, many issues -- on warrantless wiretapping, on a woman's right to choose, on labor protection.

And I've disagreed with President Obama on issues. I have been an independent, and if you take a look at the specifics on my voting record, it's consistent.

HANNITY: Well, it's actually not. I mean if we're going to be fair, we're going to be honest about this. I can give you a few quick examples here. The --

SPECTER: Go ahead.

HANNITY: The comments you made, for example, about Elena Kagan when she was becoming solicitor general were very harsh. Now as a Democrat you're going to support Elena Kagan.

You were on -- you were on "Meet the Press." You talk about health care and -- David Gregory asked you, I want to turn now to the issue of health care. You would not support a public plan. Your answer, "That's what I said." Then in The New York Times a short time later, "Yes, Schumer has it right about supporting a public component."

Card check -- you flipped in three different positions on card check. And the question I guess that I'm going to ask you is, you know, doesn't that seem like that's for pure political expediency?

SPECTER: No. And let's be specific. When you're dealt with the public option, we were talking at that point about single payer. And I opposed President Clinton's single payer, had a gigantic chart that showed the bureaucracy that many people said was a significant factor in its defeat.

When you came down to what was in the Obama plan, it was a level-playing field. And the private sector was still very much involved.

When you talk about card check, from the very start, I opposed the idea of giving up the secret ballot. Consistently, all the way through. I had said early that there was room for arbitration, providing last chance arbitration would be explored.

And if you saw the proceedings, Sean, on Solicitor General Kagan from the Supreme Court of the United States, I was very direct and very much in disagreement with her refusal to answer questions.

And I said in the final analysis, I would be for her to retain the balance on the court and because she said that she felt former Justice Thurgood Marshal was a role model. And her willingness to see the court televised. So --

HANNITY: One month before you left the Republican Party, what you said voting against her as solicitor general, you know, you were very strong. You said somebody with her strongly held belief was not qualified to be solicitor general.

And now you're a Democrat. Now you're in the Democratic caucus -- if she's not --

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Hang on. If she is not qualified to be solicitor general, how is she qualified to be a Supreme Court justice?

SPECTER: Now, wait a minute. I opposed Kagan for solicitor general because she wouldn't answer questions. Specifically, she wouldn't answer what position she would take on the issue of the holocaust victims wanting to take their case to the Supreme Court.

Specifically, on the issue of the survivors of the victims of 9/11, going to the Supreme Court. Now I thought a solicitor general ought to answer those questions. When she's up for Supreme Court of the United States, she is following suit with what everybody else is -- and that is refusing to answer questions.

continued...

< 1 2> adsonar_placementId=1502154;adsonar_pid=150758;adsonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=612;adsonar_zh=140;adsonar_jv='ads.adsonar.com'; Transcripts

Choose a category

Interviews Interviews

Latest Transcript

August 04, 2010

Please click on a date for previous transcripts:

Loading Datepicker Wednesday on Hannity

Sarah Palin talks tough on the controversy surrounding the Arizona immigration law

Wednesday's Great American Panel Jedediah Bila

Jedediah Bila is a conservative columnist and commentator. Her writings can be found at Human Events, The Daily Caller and AMAC

Craig Morgan

Craig Morgan is a country music artist and U.S. Army veteran

Juan Williams

Juan Williams is a senior national correspondent for NPR and a Fox News political contributor

Connect With Hannity MyspaceFacebookTwitterEmailMobileBlog Home U.S. World Politics Health Business SciTech Entertainment Video Opinion Sports Leisure Careers Internships - FNCU Fox Around the World RSS Feeds Advertise With Us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Contact Us Email Newsroom Topics /**/ var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www."); document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E")); try { var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-3128154-2"); pageTracker._setDomainName(".foxnews.com"); pageTracker._trackPageview(); } catch(err) {} $.ad.pre();

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," August 3, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: We begin with my interview with former Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter. Now the longtime Pennsylvania senator and I discussed a whole host of issues during our lengthy discussion. And some of it, well, it got pretty interesting.

Now it's important to note that the senator contacted us to come on the show. And he wanted to do so in order to discuss his effort to get cameras inside the U.S. Supreme Court.

Now Senator Specter has championed the issue in an effort to promote more transparency in government. But we also made it clear to his staff that there were plenty of other things that we wanted to talk to him about. And they agreed.

The rest you need to see for yourself.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HANNITY: First, you want to put cameras in the courtroom which I think I might find myself in agreement with. You know, you're talking about the Supreme Court and every other court?

SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER, D-PENN.: No, I'm talking about the Supreme Court. Many state Supreme Courts are now televised as is the highest court in Great Britain and Canada.

I want the Supreme Court to be televised because they have such a tremendous impact on the lives of all citizens. If you're a newspaper reporter, you have an absolute right to be in the courtroom and to write your story.

And now since most of the information comes on television, seems to me a logical extension for people to understand.

HANNITY: Is there any danger that -- that people play up for the courts because they know they're on television and they act differently? Is that a concern?

SPECTER: Well, that is a concern. But the cameras are hidden. They do know they are being filmed. But I think that that mild disadvantage, potential disadvantage, is far outweighed by the value of having people understand what happens in a very important facet of the government.

HANNITY: Yes. Senator, I just have a hard time figuring you out. You're somebody that I've interviewed a lot over the years. I've disagreed with you quite a bit. But I can't figure out how you could go from supporting George W. Bush in some years, 89, 90 percent of the time, and then supporting Barack Obama 96 percent of the time.

Considering their principles, their core values, their belief system is so diametrically opposed. How do -- how do you justify that?

SPECTER: Well, those statistics are really --

HANNITY: Accurate.

SPECTER:  -- misleading. Well, I'm not challenging their accuracy. But we have a lot of routine matters where almost everybody votes the same way. When President Bush was in office, I disagreed with him on many, many issues -- on warrantless wiretapping, on a woman's right to choose, on labor protection.

And I've disagreed with President Obama on issues. I have been an independent, and if you take a look at the specifics on my voting record, it's consistent.

HANNITY: Well, it's actually not. I mean if we're going to be fair, we're going to be honest about this. I can give you a few quick examples here. The --

SPECTER: Go ahead.

HANNITY: The comments you made, for example, about Elena Kagan when she was becoming solicitor general were very harsh. Now as a Democrat you're going to support Elena Kagan.

You were on -- you were on "Meet the Press." You talk about health care and -- David Gregory asked you, I want to turn now to the issue of health care. You would not support a public plan. Your answer, "That's what I said." Then in The New York Times a short time later, "Yes, Schumer has it right about supporting a public component."

Card check -- you flipped in three different positions on card check. And the question I guess that I'm going to ask you is, you know, doesn't that seem like that's for pure political expediency?

SPECTER: No. And let's be specific. When you're dealt with the public option, we were talking at that point about single payer. And I opposed President Clinton's single payer, had a gigantic chart that showed the bureaucracy that many people said was a significant factor in its defeat.

When you came down to what was in the Obama plan, it was a level-playing field. And the private sector was still very much involved.

When you talk about card check, from the very start, I opposed the idea of giving up the secret ballot. Consistently, all the way through. I had said early that there was room for arbitration, providing last chance arbitration would be explored.

And if you saw the proceedings, Sean, on Solicitor General Kagan from the Supreme Court of the United States, I was very direct and very much in disagreement with her refusal to answer questions.

And I said in the final analysis, I would be for her to retain the balance on the court and because she said that she felt former Justice Thurgood Marshal was a role model. And her willingness to see the court televised. So --

HANNITY: One month before you left the Republican Party, what you said voting against her as solicitor general, you know, you were very strong. You said somebody with her strongly held belief was not qualified to be solicitor general.

And now you're a Democrat. Now you're in the Democratic caucus -- if she's not --

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Hang on. If she is not qualified to be solicitor general, how is she qualified to be a Supreme Court justice?

SPECTER: Now, wait a minute. I opposed Kagan for solicitor general because she wouldn't answer questions. Specifically, she wouldn't answer what position she would take on the issue of the holocaust victims wanting to take their case to the Supreme Court.

Specifically, on the issue of the survivors of the victims of 9/11, going to the Supreme Court. Now I thought a solicitor general ought to answer those questions. When she's up for Supreme Court of the United States, she is following suit with what everybody else is -- and that is refusing to answer questions.

continued...

< 1 2> adsonar_placementId=1502154;adsonar_pid=150758;adsonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=612;adsonar_zh=140;adsonar_jv='ads.adsonar.com'; Transcripts

Choose a category

Interviews Interviews

Latest Transcript

August 04, 2010

Please click on a date for previous transcripts:

Loading Datepicker Wednesday on Hannity

Sarah Palin talks tough on the controversy surrounding the Arizona immigration law

Wednesday's Great American Panel Jedediah Bila

Jedediah Bila is a conservative columnist and commentator. Her writings can be found at Human Events, The Daily Caller and AMAC

Craig Morgan

Craig Morgan is a country music artist and U.S. Army veteran

Juan Williams

Juan Williams is a senior national correspondent for NPR and a Fox News political contributor

Connect With Hannity MyspaceFacebookTwitterEmailMobileBlog Home U.S. World Politics Health Business SciTech Entertainment Video Opinion Sports Leisure Careers Internships - FNCU Fox Around the World RSS Feeds Advertise With Us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Contact Us Email Newsroom Topics /**/ var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www."); document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E")); try { var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-3128154-2"); pageTracker._setDomainName(".foxnews.com"); pageTracker._trackPageview(); } catch(err) {} $.ad.pre();

Now it's important to note that the senator contacted us to come on the show. And he wanted to do so in order to discuss his effort to get cameras inside the U.S. Supreme Court.

Now Senator Specter has championed the issue in an effort to promote more transparency in government. But we also made it clear to his staff that there were plenty of other things that we wanted to talk to him about. And they agreed.

The rest you need to see for yourself.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HANNITY: First, you want to put cameras in the courtroom which I think I might find myself in agreement with. You know, you're talking about the Supreme Court and every other court?

SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER, D-PENN.: No, I'm talking about the Supreme Court. Many state Supreme Courts are now televised as is the highest court in Great Britain and Canada.

I want the Supreme Court to be televised because they have such a tremendous impact on the lives of all citizens. If you're a newspaper reporter, you have an absolute right to be in the courtroom and to write your story.

And now since most of the information comes on television, seems to me a logical extension for people to understand.

HANNITY: Is there any danger that -- that people play up for the courts because they know they're on television and they act differently? Is that a concern?

SPECTER: Well, that is a concern. But the cameras are hidden. They do know they are being filmed. But I think that that mild disadvantage, potential disadvantage, is far outweighed by the value of having people understand what happens in a very important facet of the government.

HANNITY: Yes. Senator, I just have a hard time figuring you out. You're somebody that I've interviewed a lot over the years. I've disagreed with you quite a bit. But I can't figure out how you could go from supporting George W. Bush in some years, 89, 90 percent of the time, and then supporting Barack Obama 96 percent of the time.

Considering their principles, their core values, their belief system is so diametrically opposed. How do -- how do you justify that?

SPECTER: Well, those statistics are really --

HANNITY: Accurate.

SPECTER:  -- misleading. Well, I'm not challenging their accuracy. But we have a lot of routine matters where almost everybody votes the same way. When President Bush was in office, I disagreed with him on many, many issues -- on warrantless wiretapping, on a woman's right to choose, on labor protection.

And I've disagreed with President Obama on issues. I have been an independent, and if you take a look at the specifics on my voting record, it's consistent.

HANNITY: Well, it's actually not. I mean if we're going to be fair, we're going to be honest about this. I can give you a few quick examples here. The --

SPECTER: Go ahead.

HANNITY: The comments you made, for example, about Elena Kagan when she was becoming solicitor general were very harsh. Now as a Democrat you're going to support Elena Kagan.

You were on -- you were on "Meet the Press." You talk about health care and -- David Gregory asked you, I want to turn now to the issue of health care. You would not support a public plan. Your answer, "That's what I said." Then in The New York Times a short time later, "Yes, Schumer has it right about supporting a public component."

Card check -- you flipped in three different positions on card check. And the question I guess that I'm going to ask you is, you know, doesn't that seem like that's for pure political expediency?

SPECTER: No. And let's be specific. When you're dealt with the public option, we were talking at that point about single payer. And I opposed President Clinton's single payer, had a gigantic chart that showed the bureaucracy that many people said was a significant factor in its defeat.

When you came down to what was in the Obama plan, it was a level-playing field. And the private sector was still very much involved.

When you talk about card check, from the very start, I opposed the idea of giving up the secret ballot. Consistently, all the way through. I had said early that there was room for arbitration, providing last chance arbitration would be explored.

Read Full Article »

Latest On Twitter

Follow Real Clear Politics

Real Clear Politics Video

More RCP Video Highlights »