sunday. enjoy the rest of your weekend and have a great week ahead. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] ♪ ♪ >> coming up next, "newsmakers" with tony perkins. he talks about his organization and politics in 2014. the inauguration ceremony for new jersey governor chris christie. the later stephen scheer talks about the health care law impact in his state. >> our guest this week is tony

perkins. he is the president of the family research council. thank you for being with us. two reporters will be questioning him. chief correspondent for the "washington examiner." thank you to both of you. talk to you about the state of the republican party and the role social conservatives have two planet. it seems like republican leaders are subtly trying to distance themselves from social issues. the tea party has been a strong and present oppositional force. they seem to focus primarily on physical matters. the roleour vision for that social issues play? a backseat since decades past. >> it is nothing new. there has always been that

tension. let's go back to 2012. you look at the primaries, about 50% of republican voters were social conservatives. you look at the general elections, about 25%. large a constituency to ignore. i was encouraged this week. grand prix this -- ryan's reibusus -- reince p spoken then came to a pro-life conversation. theink he understands significance of social conservatives. i do not know that you ever get to a point where there is not that tension within the party. it is there. the tea party is where focus on the fiscal issues. there is a lot of overlap. the republican party cannot afford to walk away from either of those in situ and sees. -- constituencies.

>> i know you have criticized bill cassidy considering a role for the senate seat. what about your plans? are you going to run? is ad politics, a day lifetime and a lifetime is a day. i spent almost a decade in elected office. i served with david in the louisiana legislature. he is a solid conservative with a solid record. i think he will do well in the race for governor. i'm close friends with bobby jindal he was secretary of health and hospitals when i was in office in louisiana. he still has a bright future in our nation. and david i think is going to follow the reform measures. i think david has a good path ahead of him. for me, i am focused on the ofues that a large portion

conservative minded voters are focused on. this is a long ways away. >> you have criticisms of mr. cassidy. can you talk about that? 2002 inagainst marion the primary. i was a part of the first race when she won. she is actually a friend. i talked to her fairly regularly. we served together in the legislature. differenty we have ideology. they are very good people. i enjoy them. i enjoy the friendship i have with them. that said, my politics are .ifferent than mary's in louisiana, it is a pro-life state. state. natural marriage

it is the only statewide democrat left in our state. beat a liberal you had to have a conservative. if we look at the last couple of elections, and the runoff, you've not had conservatives. you have had moderate. .an a term people out in last election she was able to turn out her base in a way that moderate cannot. >> what about the cost of these -- what about bill cassidy's record? he's not necessarily going to be conservative as other republican conservatives in congress. why are you concerned? >> louisiana is my home. i commute back and forth. i mixed with oaks regularly in

the vertical arena. he has not been catching people's enthusiastic support. his record is next. i think we will have a scorecard coming out on this current congress. i think he actually scores pretty well on our scorecard this go around. a lot of people do. it is a matter of what he leads with, what he talks about on the campaign trail. he does not talk about the life issue or natural marriage which is overwhelming supported in the state of louisiana. those are issues that people are increasingly concerned about when you juxtapose that to the policies of this administration. they want someone especially in the senate. they want someone that is going to mix it up with the administration. they know that is not what louisiana wants. i do not think they necessarily

see that in bill cassidy. >> on the issue of marriage, some polls show an increasing acceptance of gay marriage. ec states slowly adding to the role of those who legalize gay marriage, supreme court decisions, etc.. i know your organization is not in support of legalizing gay marriage. do you feel like you're writing an uphill battle? i know some states are still opposed. overall in the united states, especially amongst young people who will eventually become voters and eventually run legislatures and become the ruling drew." , they are accepting of it. how does your group it into that? how do you think about that moving forward? >> what we have seen in state s that defined marriage as

between a man and woman. it is either been opposed by the courts or the legislature, not the people. we have seen low hanging fruit for those who want to redefine marriage. just this last week, out of indiana and committee events a marriage amendment that now goes to the house floor in the indiana legislature. states ie last easier think for those that support natural marriage. that puts us at about 30 states that have definitions of marriage in their state constitution. to the young people. you have to look at the start as a snapshot. as people get older, when you look at one segment of the 18- 29, the viewpoints you hold, do have the same views you had on everything you had at that age? not really. things change. i tell you a chance for me. when i was 29 and i had my first

child. was born.aughter a law change for me. he start thinking about things differently. you buy your first house. he start picking different about tax structure in savings. you start thinking about the cultural capital. environmentt what you're bringing them into. we are starting to start seeing the consequences eared it is no longer a theoretical -- consequences. it is no longer a theoretical idea. you see photographers being called into court, being forced out of business, fined. may be-- a photographer on the supreme court because of the religious convictions. where we're at today is not going to be where they are, the may notr trajectory,

necessarily be that of tomorrow. when people begin to see the consequences of this, some will stuff back and say this is not what we signed up for. >> hindsight is 2020. you look back at some of your socially conservative that you look at the trends, some of it is generational and sometimes .eople change their minds do you think maybe we should have done something different to persuade people? to concedeot going this point. it is and i asked the question. a lot of questions are leaving in terms of the phrasing. most people are not a criminal. when do you believe the marriage a union of a marriage and a woman, there's almost a 10 point shift. of doou see the question

you believe marriage is a man is roughly, there 52% to 65% of the american public. that is not that much. i probably thing would've advocated for more aggressively was back in 2004 when the republicans controlled the senate. -- pushs the pressure for a marriage amendment. there were some that wanted an amendment that included both the definition of marriage and the birth location -- and the prohibition that may have been marriage like. a one sentence marriage in the united states union between a marriage and a woman. theindsight, had that been language that we would have passed it back then. that is the one point i would have gone back and change.

>> looking for work, would you be talking to leaders but making that a priority? >> i just think it is poignant time you will see that. is more of asee constitutional kind of doma which allows the states. we saw introduced in the house. we saw the defense of marriage provision that allows the state as the supreme court did. the decision this summer has been misconstrued. it only shut down one of the two portions of doma. one being what the federal government still marriage -- governments definition of marriage. there could be a move to provide

that type of protection for the states from a constitutional perspective. do we get there? that depends on the outcome. >> before we leave this issue, it was over this issue that your office had a very frightening incident with a shooter coming him intending to do harm. 25 years of a sentence. up over a big ramp social issues or the let's election cycle -- over the next election cycle? is anything either site can do to encourage -- to discourage violence? ?exx our system i workat makes our system more if we can have a discussion

about why we think something works. we make our best arguments. and we have to live with the consequences. that does not mean they are stagnant or they never change. it is an ongoing process. if we lose the ability to have debates and a representative form of government that we have, we will have destroyed our country. that is the biggest concern i have, whether it is through the fear of intimidation of someone coming in your building. or it is silencing the debate through intimidation but cutting people out of the process. >> i do not think anyone would disagree. leaders of organizations do anything more proactively than they are to discourage it? we have repeatedly said that we do not believe in violence

and speak out when it does occur. frankly see a lot of that type of rhetoric coming from conservative organizations. i do not see it from the mainstream liberal organizations either. i do see it from some activists like the southern poverty law center. i would not say that on either side there is a move toward violence. rise to itit gives when there are those that are wanting to show off one side of the debate. when you bottle up things that people are very passionate about, it will come out somewhere. the best thing we can do is have an open, free, fair debates. >> i had a question about elections. you'll be supporting candidates with strong records on social issues like abortion and gay marriage.

the sense i am getting from the republican party is that as we talked about earlier, they're hoping for more of an emphasis on things other than social issues. as is but you at odds with the mainstream republican party. how are conversations between you and the mainstream? more are concerned with than just the issue of abortion and natural marriage. we are concerned about tax structure. as a father of five children and ede who encourages marri couples to have kids, it is going to cost a lot. there is a whole range of issues that we are concerned about. at the top of the list is religious freedom. we do want to see candidates. you said something that is very important.

candidates say about the issues. it is their record. a prettyormance is good indicator of future performance. we do look at that. are we at great odds with the republican establishment? some. again. the establishment may control a lot of the dollars, but the conservativesal really are the numbers. >> do you see a little bit of the divide their ring comes this very issue within the republican party? would they like to have more emphasis on social issues and those who want to keep? >> it is a natural tension. this is my primary issue.

we all need one another to be successful in this process. if you saw off one of the legs, you will be teetering a bit. >> how much of a personal life of a candidate? >> those are sometimes hard to put on a scorecard. as you not buy into this idea that you have a personal life in a public life. it is a false economy. you are who you are. come, more ofures what you are is going to come forward. that has some politicians expose. at the point of exposure, they have said i messed up. i take responsibility.

they have stepped forward and taken responsibility. that some of your business. that is my personal life. at that point i say you are wrong. >> does this affect your opinion of david? >> i know him personally. back when the things came forward that he was involved in, he easy were there had not been used before in the city in a long time. ned."id i "sin i think people were breaking out the dictionary to sue that meant. he was taking ownership. i know his wife wendy.

i believe he is dealt with those issues. believe he is on the right track. i do think you will always have that cloud over him. people will be watching him closely. they have the right to do it. you open yourself up to greater scrutiny and criticism. these issues have been dealt with. just like everybody else, this is something that will constantly be there. >> a couple of questions starting with the supreme court review. there was the case of funding for coverage. what is at stake?

>> it is huge. it is absolutely huge. this is a fundamental issue of religious freedom. if you go back to send the huntington, the former deceased , in his book he talked about the protestant work ethic and how that really made america distinct from others. what was intertwined is at work was an extension of one's worship. it was part of their religious they did workt for the glory of god. that is at stake here. you cannot bring your faith into the workplace if you are an employer. some are saying it is about contraception. that is not my issue. was a mistake is a fundamental

right of religious freedom. the president also the freedom of worship. that is a truncated view of religious freedom. there is a lot at stake in this hobby lobby case that will have repercussions for generations to come. >> are there other specific aspects of the affordable care law you think are worthy of a court challenge? >> the first one lost. i think the whole thing is worth the challenge. >> i understand that. >> the taxpayer funding of abortion aspect is inconsistent with other policies passed by congress. i think the mandates on employers. they have been legally record does not make them morally right. people will continue to be upset that the government is forcing them to buy a product. congress has just reconvene .or the second session

what should be some of the priorities for republicans ?oving forward >> we have not seen a lot out of this congress. that is probably not bad. a gridlock has its advantage. of mybe biased because time in state government. andink the state government legislatures are in a row laboratories of democracy and policy. forth fromeas come the states. i really see a lot of what happens in the city as more of defensive of keeping the federal government from meddling too much in the business of the state. i am not optimistic that under the current imbalance that we are going to get anything out. i think we can contain spending, not grow our debt at the rate we have been growing at at,

obviously we have been very concerned about the religious freedom act. i am not optimistic that with harry reid in the senate and republicans controlling the house that we will get an agreement. i think it is more a defensive posture. >> let's talk 2016 politics. emagin governor bobby gentle. if he decides -- you mentioned governor bobby gentle. if he decides to run for president, would you support him? >> is not there. the challenge of having been having madee and some really great friends. rick santorum is a good friend of mine. mike huckabee is a good friend of mine.

i am far at a point from saying who i would support. andny of those i mentioned, the michele bachmann were to make a bid to any of those would certainly be welcome by me. >> is anyone has been mentioned that there is absolutely you would not support? >> know when you mentioned. >> what about chris christie? >> it is a repeat of 2012. i did everything i legally could to help met romney. -- to help met romney. pack and ourn our c4 them he did in 2000 four for george bush reelection. we knew what was at stake. end, we cannot convince

social conservatives to vote for him and the numbers that he needed. notreason is they were convinced that he was who he said he was because of his past record. they were not comfortable with him. the same thing with john mccain. you got to have someone they believe in. >> same thing with chris christie? >> i believe so. .> thank you >> we are back after a conversation with tony perkins. span, billng on c- kristol made the observation that in the old days the parties used to be bigger thames on both sides. they're much more ideologically given. on are both very interested the supremacy of ideas in the republican party, whether the simple conservatives are social

conservatives are going to have the louder voice. what did you take away from the conversation? it sounds of like social conservatives are still trying to find their voice within the republican party. that he likee michelle bachmann, mike huckabee. it is looking less likely that these are not the top tier of republicans. many are not that republican national figures that fill that void. you could tell with the debate over gay marriage that they have the upper hand on that issue. you can see the challenges socialthe conservative movement. >> there is a party right now. there's one set of the party that believes they can win by subduing the conservative issues. a social conservatives believe the opposite. if you heard him talk about mitt and john mccain, he

believes they could not win over social conservatives. it is two schools of thought. they are not backing down on this. they will not support a candidate like chris christie during the republican primary at least because they do not believe they will bring out the base. that is part of the reason we know that romney and mccain were not able to win. the last time social conservatives ideology was really pushed in the republican remember in 2004, terri schiavo? they intervened. those kinds of things and not help the party. they lost very badly in the following elections. democrats are able to take control of the house. there is a strong memory of that still. that is one of the reasons social conservative issues have been quite dormant in the house. we heard evidence of that just by talking to him about that issue.

i do not think they will this year. i think it will be a struggle. >> the interesting thing about his view of congress, he is happy with a do-nothing congress. digitss has single ratings. calm --iew shared among and services that it is better congress is an active? >> absolutely. a lot of republican theory is that federal government should do less and should not be intervening in people's lives. they should not be passing as many bills as they're passing, whereas democrats believe the opposite. democrats are in the majority. they're in session more. they believe it is the role of government to help people. republicans believe conservative republicans. let's stay out of people's lives. when he said gridlock is not a

bad thing, i think you would hear the speaker of the house say the bad -- the same thing. they do not believe the idea of go behind congress to keep passing laws. in their view getting in the way a people's lives. they believe the state have -- the state should have more control. social conservatives will not get anything passed through a democrat-controlled senate. it is a challenging times it you might as well hope nothing on the socially liberal side of the equation happens. >> wouldn't not too much about fiscal issues. he referenced they were important. congressone facing the is the debt ceiling. it looks like the date has been advanced. what is ahead with congress on the cisco issues? -- with the fiscal issues? >> the majority leader of the senate last week said