Source: Politics<\/p>\n
Congressman Ro Khanna is one of the most influential progressives inside the House Democratic Caucus. He represents California\u2019s 17th District \u2014 a large chunk of Silicon Valley. It\u2019s wealthy, influential and home to companies like Apple, Intel and Cisco Systems.<\/p>\n
Today, Playbook co-author Ryan Lizza asks Khanna what went wrong trying to pass President Joe Biden\u2019s Build Back Better plan and what he thinks progressives\u2019 influence on Biden has been. Khanna also suggests how Democrats can improve their prospects going into the midterms. Transcribed excerpts from that conversation are below, edited for length and readability.<\/p>\n
Rep. Ro Khanna: Biden has a great sense of humor. I don\u2019t think he\u2019d mind sharing this \u2014 or a sense of humor of putting you at ease. When we were discussing the Build Back Better, I said, \u201cMr. President, why don\u2019t you just get Bernie Sanders and Joe Manchin in the room and hammer this out? You don\u2019t need all these conversations. You could just cut the deal and whatever those two agree with, with you, that\u2019ll be the roadmap.\u201d And he looks at Peter Welch, who is the congressman from Vermont, and he says, \u201cYou know, Ro thinks he knows Bernie because he was the co-chair. But Peter, you and I know Bernie, right?\u201d And he says, \u201cWhat Ro\u2019s asking for is homicide, to put them in a room.\u201d And he says, \u201cIt\u2019d be like, Ro, you and me boxing. I\u2019d beat the hell out of you but why would we want to see it?\u201d So, you know, it\u2019s a disarming humor and it was in good faith.<\/p>\n
Ryan Lizza: That’s actually like a very revealing story about what happened last year. Let\u2019s break down why they couldn\u2019t do [Build Back Better] it last year. What\u2019s your big explanation for what happened?<\/p>\n
Khanna: We should have compromised with Manchin earlier, I mean in retrospect. I\u2019m still talking to him. I\u2019m still hoping.<\/p>\n
Lizza: I want to get into that. But how did it all fall apart?<\/p>\n
Khanna: I think the president\u2019s numbers turned after Afghanistan, when they started to pull back. There was an expectation \u2014 a false expectation \u2014 that they could just roll Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and they\u2019d get in line. I think it was based on the fact that everyone was unified after the American Rescue Plan.<\/p>\n
If you talk to Manchin, he\u2019ll tell you \u2014 and I\u2019m not saying anything that he wouldn\u2019t say himself \u2014 but he had made it clear that he was willing to do certain things in the American Rescue Plan that he wasn\u2019t willing to do on this, Build Back Better. And there was the hope that the momentum and everything will carry it. Ultimately, Manchin usually votes with the party and the chips would fall in line. That was the strategic calculation.<\/p>\n
Lizza:\u00a0And why was that wrong?<\/p>\n
Khanna: Well, it was wrong because Manchin didn\u2019t agree. I don\u2019t think there\u2019s anyone who in retrospect wouldn\u2019t say look we should\u2019ve made the compromise, right?<\/p>\n
Lizza: When you look back, was there a moment where you think, \u201cShit. That\u2019s the moment we should have cut that deal with the White House and Manchin,\u201d there was a window?<\/p>\n
Khanna: Before the end of the year, something went off. I\u2019d been having for six months, seven months constructive conversations with Manchin.<\/p>\n
Lizza: You were personally?<\/p>\n
Khanna: Yes. And we have a good rapport.<\/p>\n
Lizza: Have you been on the houseboat?<\/p>\n
Khanna: No, I have not been on the boat. He invited me because I\u2019ve been passionate about [getting] these tech jobs into rural communities. And so I went to Beckley, West Virginia. We had spent 45 minutes together in 2017 where he was talking about the state and he loved the idea of having these tech jobs come to Beckley. Gordon Gee, who is the president of West Virginia [University], is close to him. I\u2019ve helped him get support in Silicon Valley.<\/p>\n
So I\u2019ve had a relationship with Manchin, and I\u2019ve never questioned his motives or questioned his word in the process. Look, we have disagreements but he\u2019s coming from a place of his philosophy, and we\u2019ve got to find a compromise. And so he\u2019s always said he wants to work and come to a compromise. I thought we had a lot of momentum before the end of the year and then something went wrong.<\/p>\n
I really believe that Manchin does want to come to an agreement. But that moment is different at different times, right? So there have been moments where he wants to. I don\u2019t know where he is now but there have been those moments. And so we\u2019ve got to figure out how.<\/p>\n
My point to the progressives has been if we don\u2019t get climate now, who knows what happens in the midterms, right? It\u2019s an unknown. When are we going to get climate? This is our shot. So if you have to have some increase in something you don\u2019t want on fossil fuel production, just in a little basis, but we get $500 billion of renewable energy that\u2019s going to have an impact on the whole world and it\u2019s going to help us rebuild America, do it. Take the deal.<\/p>\n
Lizza: I was going to say, what\u2019s the reaction to, like, your fellow CPC [Congressional Progressive Caucus] members?<\/p>\n
Khanna: It was a hard \u201cno\u201d probably back in September of last year. It\u2019s softer by November, December. Now, the latest article I saw on POLITICO where a lot of members now are okay. We\u2019re willing to compromise. I believe to this day that if the president comes to a deal with Manchin and it\u2019s reasonable and you get a couple of progressives behind it that the thing will pass.<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s what can\u2019t happen. Fifteen senators afterward can\u2019t text Manchin to say, \u201cOkay, we need this, too.\u201d Like, just cut the deal, vote on it, and get it done.<\/p>\n
Lizza: I wonder if you could take us through a little bit of what the range of strategic advice is within the Congressional Progressive Caucus? You often seem to me at least to have a different approach to making the case for the progressive point of view than some of your colleagues. You talk about compromise and giving Manchin the pen and not questioning motives<\/p>\n
Khanna: What did we do wrong? I think when we attack people like Manchin, in some ways, we\u2019re attacking his voters. Instead, I think we have to also listen and say, \u201cWhat are we missing? Why is it that so many parts of the country are upset? And how are we going to respond in a constructive way to them?\u201d<\/p>\n
I think that the genius of Obama in one way was that he said, \u201cLook, I don\u2019t even belong on this stage.\u201d Literally, he said that. \u201cBut you, America, are so great that you\u2019re giving me a chance.\u201d It\u2019s American greatness. The vote for Obama was affirming American greatness, not Obama\u2019s greatness. We have to appeal to that sense, which I fundamentally believe that we\u2019re going to become this first multiracial, multiethnic democracy in the world.<\/p>\n
Of course it\u2019s a product of your own story, right? How can you not believe that, as a son of immigrants, born in Philadelphia, and the country gives me the chance to represent the most powerful place economically in the world at the age of 40? Would Germany put a son of a first-generation immigrant in charge of their most important industry region? No.<\/p>\n
So those are the places where it\u2019s the shaping of the narrative. Then finally, because if you come from a view that you don\u2019t have the monopoly on the truth, you may be less judgmental. You may just say, \u201cYou know, I disagree.\u201d I was on Neil Cavuto with Fox News and he got the better of the argument. I did better\u2026 Well, I will give myself an A-minus on the Fox News Sunday reports. Cavuto got the better of the argument.<\/p>\n
Lizza:\u00a0What was the argument?<\/p>\n
Khanna: It was on my windfall profit tax, which is to tax the oil companies and have the refund out. I still believe in the bill but I didn\u2019t think of his points, which were, \u201cOkay, well, why aren\u2019t you taxing Apple Computers and they make bigger margins and why this?\u201d<\/p>\n
Lizza:\u00a0It\u2019s pretty rare to hear a congressman say they went on Fox and had a debate about a bill they really care about and that the anchor made some points you didn\u2019t think of.<\/p>\n
Khanna: But that\u2019s the whole point of going on, right? I mean, now I\u2019m much better armed in thinking about those arguments. So I can have a better shot at convincing the independents in my district because I now have a response.<\/p>\n
You know, he said, \u201cWell, Keystone Pipeline\u201d \u2014 he has this point. Cavuto is one of the thoughtful anchors but he said, \u201cYou know, didn\u2019t Biden by not having the Keystone Pipeline hurt the oil prices?\u201d And I said, \u201cNo, he didn\u2019t because the production would have been two years out.\u201d And Cavuto, which it\u2019s amazing that they have this type of thought there, said, \u201cWell, what about the future oil prices? Because you know, Congressman, that it\u2019s not just current production, it\u2019s future production that\u2019s factored into current price.\u201d<\/p>\n
I gave an answer that wasn\u2019t very compelling. Later on, I looked it up and what I should have said is, \u201cWell, Keystone is less than 1 percent of production of oil price.\u201d But the point is, if I hadn\u2019t gone on Fox News and I hadn\u2019t subjected myself to that debate and I hadn\u2019t probably lost the debate in that moment, I would never think of the counterarguments. I\u2019d never think of the weaknesses in my own point of view.<\/p>\n
I feel so much of the Democratic Party right now is, we say if they disagree with us, they\u2019re morally wrong. And that\u2019s not the American way. The perspective is to subject yourself to the debate, what Douglass called the free ear of America of ideas.<\/p>\n
Lizza: So when the issue comes up of whether Democrats should boycott Fox or not \u2014 correct me if you think I\u2019m wrong about this \u2014 but it probably matters what show and what specific host.<\/p>\n
Khanna: Sure.<\/p>\n
Lizza: Some of them you are not going to have a necessarily good-faith debate with.<\/p>\n
Khanna: Right.<\/p>\n
Lizza: But you\u2019re generally of the view that, go test your arguments in that sort of crucible rather than the position that some Democrats take, which is \u201cFox News is irredeemable and we shouldn\u2019t go on at all.\u201d<\/p>\n
Khanna: I am of that view that you should go on not just because it\u2019s the politically smart thing to do because it will help you test your ideas, which allow you \u2014 right, in the modern media age\u2026<\/p>\n
Lizza: Are there limits to that though?<\/p>\n
Khanna: Yeah, sure.<\/p>\n
Lizza: Would you go on Tucker?<\/p>\n
Khanna: I haven\u2019t gone on Tucker. I mean, recently. I went on early on. But, yeah, there are limits. Obviously, there are limits. To anything there are limits.<\/p>\n
Lizza: But you\u2019re more inclined to go than not go, if you get asked?<\/p>\n
Khanna: I did Ben Shapiro. I\u2019m more inclined to go than not go, partly because it forces you to have an engagement. It\u2019s this interesting thing, right? It used to be that you had to come from a very conservative moderate district to test out your ideas. Now you can actually come from a pretty liberal place and test out your ideas and see if they are resonating.<\/p>\n
Lizza: You mean like with Fox News?<\/p>\n
Khanna: With a Fox News! I think it\u2019s one of the reasons that our great politicians, Bill Clinton and Obama, were so effective is that they actually spent a lot of time in places where people didn\u2019t agree with them.<\/p>\n
Lizza: Obama says that all the time. That going to Southern Illinois was the key to him understanding a lot of Americans outside of Chicago.<\/p>\n
Khanna: There\u2019s a friend of mine who\u2019s putting a roundtable together, closed, not with the press, with 15 Maytag folks who were laid off to see what they are going to think of this jobs in tech and other messages, right?<\/p>\n
Engaging politically is important. But I would argue it\u2019s substantively important. How can you be for unifying the country \u2014 that can\u2019t mean unify the county just on my terms, with my particular vision of the truth. It\u2019s got to be, \u201cI want to engage with people and find where the common ground for the modern body politic is.\u201d It doesn\u2019t mean you compromise total principles, but you have to engage.<\/p>\n
So when people say, \u201cShould we just write off Ohio or some of these states,\u201d I say it\u2019s not just politics if you believe what Obama believed in 2004, that if you want to bring this country together \u2014 which is one of the deepest aspirations of people \u2014 then you have to care substantively about these communities and try to find that common ground.<\/p>\n