With impeachment trials, upcoming elections and escalating tensions with Iran, it's a busy time in Washington. WGBH Morning Edition host Joe Mathieu spoke with New Hampshire U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who sits on the Senate's Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, about her perspective on some of the nation's most pressing issues. The transcript below has been edited for clarity.
Joe Mathieu: We've had some scary days lately — the prospect of war with Iran. I know you know more about this than most, and I realize that you cannot be specific about the evidence you were briefed on. But were you as dissatisfied by what you heard in that hearing as some of your colleagues?
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen: Well, I think what we heard from my Republican colleagues who were most outspoken, Senators Lee and Paul, was concern about the idea that in Congress, we should not be debating whether we go to war or not. It is disturbing to think that the executive branch would not appreciate that it is Congress that declares war. But the other information in the briefing, I was not as upset about as some of my colleagues because I thought it was pretty typical of the classified briefings that we get.
I think what's more important than the actual briefing is what our policy is in the Middle East, and that for me is the troubling piece. We don't seem to have a comprehensive policy and strategy that applies not just to Iran, but throughout the Middle East, and that's distressing. I think we were very fortunate — to date, anyway — in Iran's response to the killing of General Soleimani because no Americans and no Iraqis were killed in that response. Now, what we've heard from other factions of the Iranian backed militias in Iraq — of the Quds Force, which was the military force that General Soleimani headed — is that reprisals are not yet done. So my first concern is that we ensure the safety and security of our military personnel across the Middle East and of our diplomatic and other Americans who are in the Middle East. I think nobody mourns the loss of Soleimani. He was a bad person who had the blood of Americans on his hands. I think the question was whether that was the best option to address the potential threat to Americans in the Middle East. And that remains to be seen.
Mathieu: Well, it is something. You talk about strategy. Since the '80s, Iran has been the third rail of geopolitics. You don't want to start a war with Iran. There are [potentially] global implications. Do we need to create a strategy? And I ask you that through your unique view on the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee. This is a debate and a discussion we need to have.
Shaheen: Absolutely, it's a debate we need to have. And I think it goes beyond Iran, although as you say, Iran has been an adversary for a very long time. But it goes to the whole Middle East, and I think, unfortunately, when President Trump made the announcement in December of 2018 that he was planning to withdraw troops from Syria, it raised questions about America's willingness to support our partners, as with the Syrian democratic forces in Syria, who had been such a good ally. And we were there maintaining stability in the northeast part of Syria, preventing Russia and Assad and Iran from having a bigger role there. When he made that announcement, it became clear that America couldn't be counted on. I think that's a very dangerous message to send to an Iranian regime that is already looking at places where they can cross the line and take action against Americans.
Mathieu: Can I ask you, Senator Sheheen, about Iraq? The history that we have in that country, some think we're about to be asked to leave. The parliament there has already taken that step, of course, following the Iranian strikes in Iraq. What should the U.S. do, in your opinion, for our next move in Iraq?
Shaheen: Well, again, that's the challenge of not having an overarching strategy for the region.
Mathieu: Should we maintain a presence there, in your view?
Shaheen: I think it's important that we not withdraw precipitously from Iraq, as we did from Syria. Even though we still have troops there, we set off this series of events. We have obviously a lot of lives and treasure that have been spent in Iraq. And unfortunately, what we've seen as the result of the strike against Soleimani has been the action that the Iraqi parliament has taken to ask the United States to leave Iraq. We have 15,000 more troops now in the Middle East than we did at the beginning of the summer and that's an unclassified number, so it's not clear exactly how many are there. We have seen both in Iran and Iraq, where we were seeing massive demonstrations against Iran and the Iranian regime in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon. We've seen those demonstrations now turned against the United States rather than Iran. There has been fallout in ways that I think were not necessarily anticipated by that action. So that's why it's important for us to be thinking about not just the immediate response to an action like the killing of Soleimani, but what is going to be the response from Iran and Iranian factions across the Middle East, and then what is our response to that so that we're thinking steps ahead as opposed to just immediate response to that particular move.
Mathieu: There's a lot to talk about this morning. You're also about to be a juror in an impeachment trial. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she will be sending the articles of impeachment. Are you concerned, as some are, about this being a fair trial?
See all of our impeachment coverage
Shaheen: I think it's very important that it be a fair trial. As I think most Americans know, as senators, we sit like jurors. We're not officially jurors, because it's not a trial as we think about a criminal or civil trial in court. But we make a decision about the articles of impeachment that the House will send over and whether we believe the president in this case should be removed from office. So it is very important. In fact, as senators, our oath of office, which we take when we're sworn in, is not the only oath that we take before this impeachment proceeding. We also take an oath that says essentially that we say that we will be fair and impartial in looking at the evidence. I think that's what people are concerned about when we have members of the Senate who say Mitch McConnell, who has already said he's going to support the White House.
Mathieu: The leader of the Senate.
Shaheen: Correct. When we have Lindsey Graham who says, 'I've already made up my mind. I'm not even going to look at the documents or any of the evidence.' I think that's not what the American people are looking for. I think the American people want us to weigh the evidence [and] they want to see that we get the information that we need. We will get some of that from the House. I share the concern that there are other people I would like to hear from in the Senate — people who were engaged directly in those conversations as well. I would like to see some of the documents that we haven't yet seen [and] be able to see as much of that evidence as possible.
Mathieu: Another issue here, Senator, is timing. This trial is creeping up on Iowa and a little thing called the New Hampshire primary. I wonder if you're concerned about this hanging over the first votes cast in this election cycle or if those are two different worlds for you.
Shaheen: Well, I think they're two different issues. I think it's important for the American people for us to have this trial [and] to go ahead and act as soon as we can. So I do think that's important, but it's a different issue than the New Hampshire primary and the Iowa caucuses and the presidential selection process.
Mathieu: You know, it was in the New Hampshire primary — I can't believe it's already four years ago — that a lot of the presidential candidates, including a man named Donald Trump, told me at that point they heard about the opioid crisis for the first time when they were campaigning in New Hampshire. They traveled the country and heard about it again, but that was the first time. And of course, here in New England, we have really felt the brunt of this crisis. You've been part of a push to get federal resources to help fight the opioid crisis, instrumental in adding meth and cocaine dependencies for federal recovery assistance. This is an interesting scenario, Senator, where we've spent so much time focused on opioids and Narcan has been very effective in helping to lower fatal overdoses. You're seeing them go up in your state when it comes to other drugs, though.
Shaheen: It's very distressing to see how hard hit we have been, and the federal resources have been absolutely critical. What we've seen is that this epidemic has now morphed. We are seeing more drugs, methamphetamines [and] cocaine. So as the epidemic has changed, we need to change how we're responding and make sure that the resources that have been focused solely on opioids can now be used to address other drugs that are coming into the state.
Mathieu: So you've essentially widened the criteria for substances, for people to get help on the federal level.
Shaheen: We have. What I was hearing as I traveled around New Hampshire for the last year or so was from law enforcement [and] from treatment providers that what they were seeing was a return of these other drugs and that they weren't able to use the dollars that were there to address people who were coming through the door affected by meth, they couldn't deal with the cocaine piece, and so making sure that there was some flexibility was really important to everybody who is responding to the epidemic.
Mathieu: It reminds us of how fluid this whole situation is. Access to health care and health care costs are two huge issues in this campaign that will be discussed already being debated widely in New Hampshire. I want to ask you about a move you made recently to lower costs. It is something our own governor, Charlie Baker, has proposed on the state level that you're doing on the federal level: eliminating surprise billing in emergencies.
Shaheen: The surprise billing issue is so frustrating for so many people because they think they've got insurance coverage, they have to go to the hospital or get a procedure done, and months or weeks later they get this bill that they weren't anticipating. Now, one of the factors that has influenced the debate in Washington has been the involvement of a group that called itself "Doctor-Patient Unity" that has run over $50 million in ads. What we saw in those ads is that it made it sound like if Congress did anything to address surprise billing, it was going to benefit the insurance companies and be to the detriment of patients. Come to find out that those ads were being run by two private equity companies, Blackstone and KKR. And they were doing it because they had made significant investments in doctors' practices that specialize in surprise billing. So they have billions of dollars on the line.
Mathieu: So that would imply this was happening on purpose.
Shaheen: Absolutely it was happening on purpose.
Mathieu: These equity firms own companies that were in the business of surprising people by pulling them into tests or getting treatments that were out of network.
Shaheen: And there were two issues here. One is the fundamental underlying issue, which is surprise billing, and who are we really trying to protect here? Are we trying to ensure that patients and providers in the health care system [are] dealt with fairly? Or are we trying to protect these private practices and the bottom line for private equity companies?
Mathieu: So are you ending this practice, or is it over?
Shaheen: Well, we're still trying to come to an agreement on legislation that would address surprise billing. I was hoping we were going to get this done before the holidays, but that didn't happen. So I am confident that we will see a process set up to address surprise billing in a way that will benefit consumers.
Mathieu: It sounds like that could be one of the big issues of the new year, in fact, on a legislative level.
Shaheen: There is certainly no shortage of things that we need to be working on, and the best way to get things done is to work together. What has not been a benefit for the people of New Hampshire, of Massachusetts, of this country, has been the partisanship that continues to increase.
Mathieu: Have you endorsed in the primary?
Shaheen: I'm not going to.
Mathieu: You're not going to at all?
Shaheen: I have a re-election campaign in 2020. I'm staying focused on that.
Mathieu: Well, you'll have a lot of Senate colleagues in your state for a while.
Shaheen: I will. It's been it's been exciting to see all of the interest and all the people who have turned out for everyone who's running. And to have a lot of that energy is really encouraging.
