[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] host: here to talk to us today

are two reporters. thanks to both of you. >> mr. trump,, you issued a statement. is a disappointing employment report and you criticized the president wanted him to focus more on job creation. has he taken your -- patty take your advice where would we be now? guest: he should have taken a lot of people's advice. most of the mainstream economists and the people who know what to do to get the economy moving, he should focus on jobs and put people back to work and. from last july or august, he started on the program and it has shown -- it has done some real good. we had 26 months of job growth in the private sector, 19 months of continuous job growth

overall. unemployment is down to 8.1%. i am disappointed in the figures, 115,000 is not enough to keep up with job growth for the population growth so we will not get out of the hole with those numbers but we are moving in the right direction. all this talk about cutting back on programs and austerity will take a shaky recovery and moved in the wrong direction. >> you are gearing -- getting very frustrated with him and you talked publicly about that. had he taken your devised earlier on, would we be further along that? guest: if he would -- he made a strategic mistake of focusing on the deficit problem. we have a mid term or long term deficit problem. we have cut triton's of dollars out of that deficit.

60% of the deficit comes from the bush policies, the tax cuts and boat oars, 12% comes from the obama policies of the rest comes in the recession. if he had started three or four months earlier, it might have helped some but republicans would still have been where they are, trying to stop everything he tries to do. as mitch mcconnell said, their number one priority was getting rid of the president, not threaten the economy, not creating jobs, not providing health care to people but getting rid of the president. >> the reelection campaign of president obama is under way and you have endorsed him. let me ask you about the afl-cio strategy this year. in the past, democrats have been accused of taking labor for granted and you have said recently he will hold the democrats' feet to the fire and hold them accountable for not

aligning with working people priorities. how is your shift in strategy going this year and how will you change what you do in order to make sure that happens? guest: that is the most important part i have talked about is what we are doing. and in the past, we is to give money to party structure. that party structure would do different things with it but did not build power for working people. this election and the following election, because we are viewing these in three and four alexian blocks, not just a single election -- it is about building power for working people and working-class people. our program will not be geared toward the grassroots. we are trying to make lemonade out of lemons with the citizens united decision. we want to talk to non-union workers are program will be geared toward educating and mobilize and union workers and

non-union workers as well. we are all in this together, all the workers, whether they are represented by a union or not. the type of economy we have sealed last several years hurts all workers. it is time for us to come together and we will put together a permanent campaign structure. in the past, we put our campaign structure in seven or eight months before the election day and after election day, we tore it down. this time, we will continue to build after election day and to outreach to partners and the civil-rights community and the latino community and bring people together. we will continue doing that in between elections. we should be able to move from electoral politics to advocacy and then from advocacy to accountability. we will be able to hold those politicians accountable, democrat or republican. >> how much do you plan to spend this election cycle? are you giving less directly to

democrats? >> i am always fascinated with you guys and when you ask how much we will spend and not how much we will do. we can outspend by multiples, 30-one. that is not the issue. the issue is what we will do. we will talk to people and continue to go after those people on the ground and educate them and register them and work with our allies in the african- american and latino community to register voters and then educate them and get them out to the polls on election day. we'll use our super pac unlike other people. the karl rove super pac to a barrage of negative ads against anybody they don't like. we will not be doing that but we will use our money to be able to talk to non-union workers.

in the past, we could not do that. >> does that mean less money going to individual candidates? >> there are three or four different kinds of candidates. there are real friends, acquaintances, and enemies. enemies will not get any money and acquaintances will probably get less and friends will get more help. >> that is a nice lead into what is happening next week in wisconsin. there's a primary election on tuesday. this is a test run for labor enter strategy, taking on governor scott walker in a recall. >> it is not a test run. we have already done that. ohio was a test run. >> in wisconsin, the candidate who seems to be getting the labor support is not doing well in the democratic primary where as milwaukee mayor tom barrett seems to be the front runner and

he has had a rocky relationship with labor. what are the stakes for you in wisconsin? >> it after the primary is over, everybody will come together and support the candidate. when michelle bachmann endorsed mitt romney, the person she said was the next best thing to evil a few weeks earlier, there has been disputes with both of those candidates. most of the labor supported one or the other. after the election, they will come together and i think we will take out scott walker. he is still very unpopular. he is permanently on popular because he took on and attacked workers rather than creating jobs. he told that population he would do that if he was i elected. in wisconsin, the last time we took out two or three republican

senators. the four races that occurred, obama won that state by about 13%. in that election, these four senators won their senate seats by an equal number. they were state senate seats and we took two of them out. the total vote of those four senate seats, we got a little over 50%. they got 50 + and two seats in of the other cities. in their highest performing districts, they lose two seats, they barely hold on to one and another wins. couple more senators go by the wayside this team and hopefully what you will see is a change of attitude by the senators that are there on both sides of the aisle to be able to say that they sent us here to create jobs and fix the economy, not to make war on workers, not to demonize workers and take everything away. >> are you saying that wisconsin

is not viewed as a test run for labor? >> everything we do is an important test. if they lose in ohio, we are dead. everything is an important test because it has relied consequences for workers. that is what is important theme what would it mean a governor walker hangs on to the governorship? >> it would mean that he would be a debilitated governor for the next two years in office and he would be finished the next time he runs. >> what would it say about the president obama prospects of winning in wisconsin? >> i don't know that would say anything. they will probably spend more money in wisconsin then they will do in most other states. >> would it emboldened lawmakers and other states to stress

collective bargaining rights? >> a year after u.n. office, would you like to be in the vote to hold onto a seat you're supposed to have for four years and you lose the senate, a majority in the senate. with that in bolden you? it yourself and rational it would not. >> we talked about workers' rights and the national labor relations board and is an agency that was traded to protect workers' rights and oversee organizing elections and settle disputes between employers and employees. you have been complimentary of obama for what he has done at the board and who he has a boy -- appointed to the board. are you concerned that the board is being wewe didn't? >> the republican party has said

they are against workers. they are against trade unions. they will do everything they can. it is not about fairness or enforcing the law, is about making us weaker so that we cannot fight for workers. we won that fight. was a vote in the senate to take away those rights. every single democratic senator voted for us. and 1 republican senator, lisa murkowski from alaska and we appreciate her support. it is a constant. they have been fighting us forever. i am more worried about a guy like terence flynn who is on the board. the first report said he was in violation of ethics law, giving information to the mitt romney advisers. there was a supplemental bill recently. not only did he give away information, this time he traded

information to mitt romney advises that they would help him get confirmed. he was giving something for value. he was getting votes for value and i don't know, that sounds close to criminality. >> i did see the ig report and it was a former mitt romney adviser named in the report them and give us some context. >> it is what of the two republican members on the agency. >> he gave inside information that violated ethics. not a single republican on the hill has said it about this, not one. he has not resigned, either. if that were a democrat or had been a labor person, they would have been doing handstands in front of the fox news 24/7 but not a word. >> he is one of the republican members of the board and has

been accused of disclosing internal board information to former board members. there have been two reports and you have called for his resignation. do you think president obama should call for his resignation? >> yes, i think he should not be on the board. i think he is being improper and what he did violated the ethics rules and i don't think he should be there. he has shown he is no longer capable of neutral decisions. that is what they are supposed to be. it is supposed to be an independent agency that takes faqs and tries cases and decide to winds on the block. when you have someone who is committed to the other side already and biased and giving inside information, it is illegal. it's like a judge talking to a lawyer in the middle of a case. that is wrong. that calls the whole system into question and he has not come out and said he is sorry.

>> staying on the issue of workers' rights -- a huge issue for you guys four years ago was the employee first choice act. it did not work out but the major argument for union members and their families to support president obama was that he would be the union friend and push the employee free choice act. some people think the president did not push hard enough for it. if that was your argument four years ago, why should they come back and fight again and go out to vote and campus and volunteer if it did not work out? >> that was only one reason. we are not monolithic. we are not likely and are a.

his view on the economy -- he wants an economy that works for the 99%, not just the 1%. he wants tax codes that are fair. we have disagreements with them -- with him. had he done things differently, absolutely i wish that. i also know when you put all the facts together and mitt romney is here and barack obama is here, romney does not get off the ground and the president is way up here standing for working people. there will be people who say i won't vote for this president because of x or y. but there will also be people who will vote for him for the same reason. >> will he be voted in for a second term? >> which is that a vote on those issues. the national labor relations board came out with rules that

will make the elections fair and faster. it will get rid of some of the -- some of the delays that employers have used for years and union buster is used for years. they did not want any changes in labor laws. they liked the broken system that was in favor of employer is. >> so that is no longer a priority? >> it is still a priority because it is good for the country. and collective bargaining is important because our economy is 72% driven by consumer spending. consumers cannot spend or create demand if they don't have money in their pockets. the link between productivity and wages is broken. not enough people have collected bargaining. all the money that used to get shared with workers now goes to

the top 1% who only buy one local bratton said many. they might only by one car or in the case of mitt romney, several cars. it is creating demand. collective bargaining as part of a solution. its workers get a chance to get more of the well they produce, they will have more money to create demand and that demand will help create an economy that grows. that is have worked in this country for years until we decided to change the deal. we changed the deal by taking away collective bargaining. they are trying to take a republic employees. that's why scott walker is in such hot water. >> have you had specific conversations with president obama about his agenda in the second term? >> i have had conversations with the president and conversations with his staff, his cabinet,

about things like that. >> what is your impression of what would happen in an obama second term? >> i think you'll all be looking to create jobs and have a tax system that is fair and save people's pensions and try to improve health care. >> would you like to see president obama pushed for the keystone oil pipeline? there has been some division about that when he earlier opposed it for environmental reasons. many of your affiliate unions have been divided about whether they want to see the pipeline. ord -- where you stand? >> they are not divided. they are divided on how the pipeline is done. we are unanimous by saying we

should build the pipeline but we have to do it consistent with all environmental standards. i think we can work that out, i really do. we're for that happening. >> has present obama giving you assurances? >> not about the pipeline directly. >> , today it did president, take on that? -- how did the president's take a hit on that? >> they might have been able to capitalize on the but they don't have credibility on job creation because they are touting the same identical policies that got us into the mess. let me go back on job creation. george bush came into office, the economy was coming, we had a giant surplus. when george bush left office, he had fewer jobs than the day he came into office. he is the only president in recent history where we have less jobs at the end of his term

than when he began. he did everyone of these policies that they are advocating. the bay had deregulation, tax cuts to the rich, proposing more tax cuts, proposing the same identical policy. they will take a ride back into recession ignited depression. if they had had credibility like in a jobs program and any normal economist would say that could work. that would have had a credibility but they don't. >> as you assess the election and think about the role of unions that the union would pay, is there an enthusiasm problem with the base?

i assume you will be targeting people who might be more swing voters. >> there is some of that enthusiasm problem. we have 180 days, i believe, from today to work on that than what is that still exist? i think that exists within the body, and a candidate. you have to remind them of what is there and who you are running against. yes, there is some and we will work on it, and some would probably will might get in there are others that we didn't get last on the will come out and vote. our members are pretty smart. they will look at both candidates as they will sizes guest is this an magaw stance for that. when you look of those fox -- fax, obama wins hands down about mitt romney city is asking the public if you're better off than you were four years ago.

kaine pay our -- can you pay your mortgage more easily? what will you tell the ones who might be on the fence? >> is sort of a false choice about why or when. mitt romney talks about the rise in budget. -- the paul ryan budget. that budget would give more of a tax break to the rich. george bush with good times lost jobs. or barack obama during the worst recession in the world created several million jobs. imagine what would have happened if the republican congress, the house, and the senate, instead of fighting against and everything would have said let's get together and fix the economy

and put the merits of that to work. imagine what a great job they could of done and how further advanced this recovery would be now. to putsking everyone this stuff aside for a little bit and think of america. create jobs that our kids and grandkids can have a job and buy a house and retire with some security. we want a quality public education system that helps everybody do better. you have two very different views. mitt romney says barack obama says that doesn't work. >> one final question -- >> what will happen if the president's health care bill is overturned in the court to? i hope it isn't.

we have tried for 100 years to get health care started. the bill is not perfect. i would be the first to admit that but it is a great start. people like mitt romney's kids are on his health care bill because of that bill. those things helped a lot of people. we have made some mistakes and we should go back and say we need a public auction. 94% of our health care markets in this country are highly concentrated. that means there is either one or two companies in than know, it is an area. the good of the competition that forces them to create things that would have driven -- driven prices. we should also not have conceded to the former government

you use your buying power to get the best deal you can. we don't do that and we have given that away. we need to change that and bring that back. there is a lot of work to be done. if a were overturned, i think it would stem the country on its head and health care would be in chaos that you would see a lot of people get hurt in the process. >> we have to leave it there, richard trumka, president of the afl-cio, thanks for being on "newsmakers." what stood out to you? >> richard trumka demanded karen flynn's resignation and he would like to see the president state that mr. flynn should resign. he said he also wants the

president to call for it, that would create a bit of chaos, a bit of a stir in washington if that happens. what did you hear? >> i of his discussion of wisconsin was interesting in that he kept wanting to downplay what the results there might mean. he says it is a possibility that scott walker could prevail despite the tens of millions of dollars being thrown at him by the unions. the conventional view is that if scott walker wins, that is a huge setback labor union. pay also seemed to downplay what it would mean about the public opinion about labor unions. it may and bold and several other politicians in other states to take on labor and take on a collective bargaining.

he said it would not but many people -- many people believe it would. >> did you get a real sense of the relative -- of the role of unions? said of the health care law is overturned, it could set things in motion? what if that doesn't come to pass? >> they are relevant and the election year is always about the money they can spend. but thought he was vague in his discussion about their new tactics. and the one hand, he says he will go all grassroots. i don't know what that means in terms of how they will spend their money and how that will fit into the very carefully managed an orchestrated get-out- the-vote operation be graded by the obama campaign. oftentimes, the unions could be a good way to reach out to working-class white voters which

is an area of vulnerability. he is talking about targeting other groups. i did not >> they understand his that. on he mentioned african-american voters and latino voters. in talking with him before and afl-cio, they intend the year and infrastructure in state and said that after the election is over, they can have more people in states that are willing to advocate for labor priority and hold local politicians to what they have said they will do for labor unions and brother were the people. organizing for america after the 2008 election and they found that to be extremely difficult to pull off. it was a blow big disappointment for the activists involved. for the activists involved.