‘Meet the Press’ transcript for Dec. 23, 2007

MR. TIM RUSSERT:  Our issues this Sunday:  Our Meet the Candidates 2008 series continues, an exclusive interview with Republican Ron Paul.  He has served in the U.S. House of Representatives for 18 years.  In 1988 he was the Libertarian Party candidate for president.  Since October he has raised nearly $19 million.  That is more than any other Republican candidate for president. Our guest, Dr. Ron Paul.

Then, only 11 days to the Iowa caucuses, the candidates unveil special holiday political commercials.

(Videotape)

FMR. GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE:  What really matters is a celebration of the birth of Christ.

(End videotape)

(Videotape)

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON:  Where did I put universal pre-K?

(End videotape)

(Videotape)

FMR. MAYOR RUDY GIULIANI:  It'll be a really nice fruitcake with a big, red bow on it.

(End videotape)

(Videotape)

Barack Obama's Daughter:  Merry Christmas.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  The very latest polls and strategies with John Harwood of CNBC and The New York Times, and Chuck Todd, political director for NBC News.

But first we're joined by Dr. Ron Paul, Republican candidate for president.

Dr. Paul, welcome to MEET THE PRESS.

REP. RON PAUL (R-TX):  Thank you.  Nice to be here.

MR. RUSSERT:  Let's start right at the very top, the issues.  This is what you have been saying on the campaign stump, "I'd like to get rid of the IRS. I want to get rid of the income tax." Abolish it.

REP. PAUL:  That's a good idea.  I like that idea.

MR. RUSSERT:  What would happen to all those lost revenues?  How would we fund our government?

REP. PAUL:  We have to cut spending.  You can't get rid of the income tax if you don't get rid of some spending.  But, you know, if you got rid of the income tax today you'd have about as much revenue as, as we had 10 years ago, and the size of government wasn't all that bad 10 years ago.  So there're sources of revenues other than the income tax.  You know, you have, you have tariff, excise taxes, user fees, highway fees.  So, so there's still a lot of money.  But the real problem is spending.  But, you know, we lived a long time in this country without an income tax.  Up until 1913 we didn't have it.

MR. RUSSERT:  But, but you eliminate the income tax, do you know how much lost revenue that would be?

REP. PAUL:  A lot.  But...

MR. RUSSERT:  Over a trillion dollars.

REP. PAUL:  That's good.  I mean, we--but we could save hundreds of billions of dollars if we had a sensible foreign policy.

MR. RUSSERT:  Well...

REP. PAUL:  And if you go--if you're going to be the policeman of the world, you need that.  You need the income tax to police the world and run the welfare state.  I want a constitutional-size government.

MR. RUSSERT:  Would you replace the income tax with anything else?

REP. PAUL:  Not if I could help it.  You know, there are some proposals where probably almost anything would be better than income tax.  But there's a lot of shortcomings with the, with the sales tax.  But it would probably be slightly better than the income tax--it would be an improvement.  But the goal is to cut the spending, get back to a sensible-size government.

MR. RUSSERT:  But if you had a flat tax, 30 percent consumption tax, that would be very, very punishing to the poor and middle class.

REP. PAUL:  Well, I know.  That's why I don't want it.

MR. RUSSERT:  So you have nothing?

REP. PAUL:  I want to cut spending.  I want to get a--use the Constitution as our guide, and you wouldn't need the income tax.

MR. RUSSERT:  Let's talk about some of the ways you recommend.  "I'd start bringing our troops home, not only from the Middle East but from Korea, Japan and Europe and save enough money to slash the deficit."

How much money would that save?

REP. PAUL:  To operate our total foreign policy, when you add up everything, there's been a good study on this, it's nearly a trillion dollars a year.  So I would think if you brought our troops home, you could save hundreds of billions of dollars.  It's, you know, it's six months or one year or two year, but you can start saving immediately by changing the foreign policy and not be the policeman over the world.  We should have the foreign policy that George Bush ran on.  You know, no nation building, no policing of the world, a humble foreign policy.  We don't need to be starting wars.  That's my argument.

MR. RUSSERT:  How many troops do we have overseas right now?

REP. PAUL:  I don't know the exact number, but more than we need.  We don't need any.

MR. RUSSERT:  It's 572,000.  And you'd bring them all home?

REP. PAUL:  As quickly as possible.  We--they will not serve our interests to be overseas.  They get us into trouble.  And we can defend this country without troops in Germany, troops in Japan.  How do they help our national defense?  Doesn't make any sense to me.  Troops in Korea since I've been in high school?

MR. RUSSERT:  What...

REP. PAUL:  You know, it doesn't make any sense.

MR. RUSSERT:  Under President Paul, if North Korea invaded South Korea, would we respond?

REP. PAUL:  I don't--why should we unless the Congress declared war?  I mean, why are we there?  Could--South Korea, they're begging and pleading to unify their country, and we get in their way.  They want to build bridges and go back and forth.  Vietnam, we left under the worst of circumstances.  The country is unified.  They have become Westernized.  We trade with them.  Their president comes here.  And Korea, we stayed there and look at the mess.  I mean, the problem still exists, and it's drained trillion dollars over these last, you know, 50 years.  So stop--we can't afford it anymore.  We're going bankrupt.  All empires end because the countries go bankrupt, and the, and the currency crashes.  That's what happening.  And we need to come out of this sensibly rather than waiting for a financial crisis.

MR. RUSSERT:  So if Iran invaded Israel, what do we do?

REP. PAUL:  Well, they're not going to.  That is like saying "Iran is about to invade Mars." I mean, they have nothing.  They don't have an army or navy or air force.  And Israelis have 300 nuclear weapons.  Nobody would touch them.  But, no, if, if it were in our national security interests and Congress says, "You know, this is very, very important, we have to declare war." But presidents don't have the authority to go to war.

MR. RUSSERT:  You...

REP. PAUL:  You go to the Congress and find out if they want a war, do the people want the war.  But it's totally unnecessary.  I mean, that, that, to me, is an impossible situation...

MR. RUSSERT:  If...

REP. PAUL:  ...for the Iranians to invade Israel.

MR. RUSSERT:  This is what you said about Israel.  "Israel's dependent on us, you know, for economic means.  We send them" "billions of dollars and they," then they "depend on us.  They say, `Well, you know, we don't like Iran.  You go fight our battles.  You bomb Iran for us.' And they become dependent on us."

Who in Israel is saying "Go bomb Iran for us"?

REP. PAUL:  Well, I don't know the individuals, but we know that their leaderships--you read it in the papers on a daily--a daily, you know, about Israel, the government of Israel encourages Americans to go into Iran, and the people--I don't think that's a--I don't think that's top secret that the government of Israel...

MR. RUSSERT:  That the government of Israel wants us to bomb Iran?

REP. PAUL:  I, I don't think there's a doubt about that, that they've encouraged us to do that.  And of course the neoconservatives have been anxious to do that for a long time.

MR. RUSSERT:  Would you cut off all foreign aid to Israel?

REP. PAUL:  Absolutely.  But remember, the Arabs would get cut off, too, and the Arabs get three times as much aid altogether than Israel.  But why, why make Israel so dependent?  Why do we--they give up their sovereignty.  They can't defend their borders without coming to us.  If they want a peace treaty, they have to ask us permission.  They can't--we interfere when the Arab leagues make overtures to them.  So I would say that we've made them second class citizens.  I, I think they would take much better care of themselves. They would have their national sovereignty back, and I think they would be required then to have a stronger economy because they would have to pay their own bills.

MORE FROM MEET THE PRESS

Meet the Press Section Front

Nov. 8: Casey, Barbour, Rendell, roundtable, Brokaw Nov. 1: Tim Geithner, David Plouffe, roundtable Oct. 25: Cornyn, Schumer, Burnett, Sorkin, roundtable Oct. 18: Jarrett, Dodd, Kyl, Shriver, Podesta Oct. 11: Levin, Graham, McCaffrey, Myers, roundtable Oct. 4: Ambassador Susan Rice, roundtable Sept. 27: Bill Clinton, Paterson, Kyl, Webb Sept. 20: President Obama, Sen. Graham, Rep. Boehner, roundtable Sept. 13: Durbin, Cornyn, Dean, Gingrich, roundtable Sept. 6: Axelrod, roundtable Meet the Press Section Front   Add Meet the Press headlines to your news reader: