Rep. Joe Kennedy, III joined WGBH News to discuss Boston's potential to become the location for Amazon's second headquarters and the temporary government funding bill that must be passed by Friday at midnight. Below is a transcript of this interview. Click the audio player above to listen to the interview.
Marilyn Schairer: Welcome Congressman Joseph Kennedy, representing the 4th Congressional District. Thank you for joining us. We've asked you to join us to discuss the potential for a government shutdown. Before we do, did want to ask you your reaction to Amazon's announcement on Twitter this morning that Boston made the short list of cities that the Internet giant's second headquarters. What's your reaction?
Joe Kennedy: Very exciting news, I think great news, great news for Massachusetts, great news for Boston, certainly. I think Boston would make a great home for Amazon and [I'm excited] for the job it's going to bring. I do think it's critically important, though, given that we are out in the final stages of this, that there'd be an awful lot of public engagement and transparency to this process. Boston, obviously the city, greater Boston area as a regional economy is doing very, very well. But if we're talking about incentives that are going to be used in order to lure Amazon into our community, I just want to make sure that those are incentives that are coming in addition to and not at the expense of some of the investments that we need to make to make sure that the growth that we're seeing in Boston extends to the rest of the state. So those are initiatives like south coast rail, like affordable housing, like high speed rail and Worcester and Springfield, like ... affordable child care and education. It can't come at the expense of those initiatives that, as I go across my district around the state, those are our real economic issues that people are struggling with every single day. And having Amazon here is great. We need to make sure that we're doing both of these, and I think we can.
MS: There is there there is a lot at stake, of course. There's talk of 50,000 jobs being brought in, an investment of $5 billion dollars in construction. And one concern, especially after some of the storms we've had in the transportation and the infrastructure issues, is would Boston be able to handle that. I would imagine Amazon will be looking at that. But what are your thoughts and how would you suggest the city and the state, in fact, approach some of these problems?
JK: So I think it's a good challenge to have. I think that one, that those forecasts on 50,000 jobs is over, you know, a significant time horizon. So it's not going to be 50,000 jobs immediately. But what that means is we're going to be really thoughtful about the type of development we want in Boston and the greater Boston area. And that's where issues like commuting, issues like traffic issues, like education and schooling, those are the type of investment that Amazon will bring, can help catalyze some of that. But we've got to be really thoughtful about how we're going to to use this moment to leverage some of those concerns for current residents around our greater Boston community and not just use this as a way to attract — yes, 50,000 high paying jobs, which are fantastic. And what it would mean to be able to have Amazon as a force in Boston. But again, making sure that as we talk about the stewardship of taxpayer dollars and these incentives, that it's not coming at the expense of people that live outside of 128 and 495. My district extends beyond those communities to communities like Taunton and Fall River that have been advocated for and been promised for a long time. Investments like south coast rail, trying to make sure there are access points from the south coast into Boston so you're not stuck on Route 24 in a traffic jam every single day. And I do think that there's ways that we can make sure we're attracting companies like Amazon while also making good on these promises of regional equity across our Commonwealth. We need to do both. I don't think this has to be either or, if it is either or, I think that's a discussion Massachusetts needs to have.
MS: I don't want to put you on the spot, but any comparative analysis that you can think of in terms of having a company this large making, potentially, these types of promises to something in our, you know, our recent past or history of having a big company move into the area and being able to manage it.
JK: It's certainly something that is, I say, in recent history, unprecedented. Obviously we got a lot of attention around the latest GE move and what that means in terms of jobs and investment in Boston. This obviously — the proposal here dwarfs that. I do think when you look at the fundamentals for Boston, I think that's what is attracting folks like GE and like Amazon, where you've got leading educational institutions, you've got good infrastructure, you've got good schools, you've got a knowledge-based economy, you've got an airport that is a global hub, you've got a lot of fundamentals here that are working really, really well. It does mean that we have to be very thoughtful about how we think about this growth in the next chapter going forward. And so, it's a really exciting prospect. I think it's something that that Boston should be very proud of. Some of those other cities on the list should be very proud of it as well, it's going to be a real competition going forward, which is fine. But again, I think it means that our policymakers have to be considerate and careful as to how we make sure we balance these opportunities for investments from companies like Amazon with the regional economic equity that we that our citizens deserve.
MS: OK, on to the issue of the federal government, potential shutdown, Friday at midnight, if Congress doesn't act. Now, many Democrats have said they won't vote for a bill to fund the federal government, especially without a deal on DACA. Where do you stand on this today?
JK: You know, the amazing part about this at the moment is that it's changing by the moment because of the president United States. Look, we should be able — federal government should be able to do a couple of basic things: We should be able to make sure that 800,000 Americans that grew up in this country that came here when they were children through no issue on their own to be able to stay here. And again, remember that this is a crisis that was brought on by the Trump administration declining to continue a DACA program put fourth by President Obama. This is a crisis that President Trump has created, and it's a crisis that, for whatever reason, he refuses to solve. There was a bipartisan deal that was put together last week between Senate Democrats and Republicans that they went to the White House for approval and it was scuttled by President Trump and a couple of other conservatives. It's unconscionable that we're even at this point, it's extremely disappointing that we're having this conversation. It seems like things were starting to work its way out, and then the president went on Twitter again this morning and seems to have blown it up all over again. Everybody across this country, I think at this point should be able to say we deserve better and of our of our government than to somehow have to hold the fate of 800,000 kids in the country hostage to the whims of President Trump.
MS: And you're right, he's also changed his mind now about the Children's Health Insurance Program, saying it shouldn't be part of a short-term budget deal that was briefly on the table, some sort of six-year deal was in place to have the CHIP program available. And now he's gone on and said that that's not the case.
JK: So it's still part — the procedural process on this, though, is more complicated than that. That is part of the bill that we are supposed to vote on later today. That, at least to my knowledge as of now, hasn't been dropped. And it's, again, stunning to, I think a lot of us here, that CHIP is a program that was actually started by my great uncle, Sen. Kennedy, and Orrin Hatch because while there is — continues to be — a big debate about the role of the federal government health care, people now for decades have agreed that we shouldn't take out that fight on poor children. So CHIP insures 9 million poor kids and pregnant mothers across the country. It has been reauthorized now for decades on a strong bipartisan basis. Because of recent changes in law, a six-year re-authorization, which is proposed, actually saves the federal government money. So you're talking about extending health insurance benefits for 9 million ... pregnant women and children at a savings to the federal government, and for some reason this morning, the president decided that that's not something that should be on the table. We haven't gotten any explanation of it. I've been talking to a couple of other Republicans, congressmen so far this morning. They don't quite know what to make of it ... We'll have to see what happens.
MS: All right, I won't keep you any further, but I one final question. With all of this jockeying, it seems like with the president, especially, there's a lot of public negotiating going on, and I know that some of the Democrats I've spoken with, Congressman McGovern yesterday, have said this is not your choice, this is not the way ... you think business should be conducted in Washington, in Congress, but you you've been left to no avail. Where do you see this going? What's going to happen?
JK: Look, I think for the last year under this administration ... one piece of this [that] has been extremely frustrating has been the fact that Democrats have been cut out of most of these negotiations, period. The negotiations that are going on at the moment around funding government through at least the House of Representatives are within a Republican caucus. They're not engaging Democrats in this because they don't think that they need Democratic votes. They don't want Democratic votes. They want to put forth a very conservative deal, and that's that's their choice. But it means — like we saw in the health care bill, and like we saw on a tax bill ... and a budget — that you're getting government policies that aren't actually written for communities like Boston or Massachusetts. You're seeing policies that are written just for hardcore conservative communities that are represented by conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives. And that's the right way to govern a country when you're trying to govern for 320 million Americans. And that's the frustration I think many of us feel is to say look, I am totally open to the fact that I represent a minority party in Congress, I'm willing to make a deal, I realize I'm not going to get everything I want, Republicans are in control. But to shut Democrats out of that process to then turn around and try to jam it down your throat and then come up with some bizarre argument to try to say it's our fault if they don't vote for your bill that you haven't been that you've been totally cut out of the process on negotiating, it just — it's a sad state of affairs and a sad commentary on the politics of the day, the Republican leadership.
MS: OK Congressman, yes or no, will the government faces shutdown tomorrow at midnight or will a budget deal be passed?
JK: I think a budget to the budget deal will be passed, I expect it will be passed. That being said, I don't know what the president's going to tweet next. So we'll see.
MS: OK, I appreciate you, Congressman Joseph Kennedy. Thank you very much for your time, I appreciate you talking with us.
JK: Thank you.
