Rob Kall: Fox has, in the last month, just seen the biggest drop in audience. I see that they're letting Sarah Palin go -- it looks like you've replaced her!
Dennis Kucinich: Well, I don't know if anybody can really replace Sarah Palin.
Rob Kall: (laughs)
Dennis Kucinich: But I'm, in my own way, given the opportunity to reach out and to talk about the importance of a new direction for America in the world, away from war, away from these drone attacks; of a new direction for America at home, rebuilding America, and protecting the benefits of people who've worked for it for a lifetime -- Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Also, I'm protecting our civil liberties. I'm in a position where - all of the years of work that have permitted me to be a spokesperson and an activist - I can continue to do that. So, I'm grateful for that opportunity, but I'm involved in many different things, and I'm, at this point, continuing to consider other offers for involvement that are coming around, and I'm also on a speaking tour. Next week, on February 7th I'll be giving the Kelly Lecture in Santa Barbara. A few days later I'll be the speaker at the Western States Legal Foundation's 30th Anniversary in Oakland. A few days later I'll be speaking at a major labor rally in Wisconsin. So I'm continuing to stay active, and to advance those things that I've been talking about for my entire life, and in particular, the last sixteen  years in the United States Congress.
Rob Kall: Now, one of the reasons you're not in Congress is gerrymandering. We now have a Congress that the minority of Americans voted for, but it is solidly controlled because of gerrymandering. Is there any hope that we can do anything about this?
Dennis Kucinich: First of all, let's look at it at a couple different levels, and it's an important question that you're raising. I was doing some research on this, this morning as a matter of fact. The New York times says that there's one hundred and ninety-nine  solid Republican districts. That has a lot to do with gerrymandering. One hundred and fifty two  solid Democratic districts. It's important to know that gerrymandering was done at a state level, and can have a tremendous impact in describing the contours of a district, and in determining if there's going to be a lot of Democrats or a lot of Republicans in it. And wherever there is a Republican legislature, they did their best to try to make sure that there were solid Republican districts.
But there is something that you need to keep in mind. There's a website, I think it's called "Ballotpedia," or something like that, where they analyze races. I want to share some numbers with you and your listeners, because this shows you that this deck isn't irretrievably stacked, by any means. They point out that there were thirty  races in 2012 that had a margin of victory of less than five [5%], and in those races eighteen  winners were Democrats, twelve  were Republicans. There were thirty-three races  where the margin of victory was between five and ten percent [5-10%], and fifteen  of those winners were Democrats, eighteen  Republicans. Here's something that's worth thinking about: eighty-seven  races had a margin of victory between ten and twenty percent [10-20%], and of those eighty-seven races, twenty-three  were Democrats and sixty-four  were Republicans. It's in those districts that if you have Republicans who are not responding to the practical aspirations of people, districts like that can flip.
Look, I took a district, years ago, from a Republican member of Newt Gingrich's leadership team, and I did it running on a Progressive program of jobs for all, Healthcare for all, Education for all, and peace. So even though it is true that gerrymandering has produced a solid bloc of Republicans towards a Republican majority, it is not true that it's always going to stay that way. And Republicans are aware of that; because of the changes that happened to the party at the primary level with the Tea Party, and also because of the changes that are happening in national politics. You look at issues that deal with the debt, spending; there is some apprehension out there among Republicans about whether or not they're meeting the needs of their constituents, and I think that you're going to see, that notwithstanding the obvious advantage that Republicans have at the Congressional district level, that the electorate in many cases still remains up for grab in those areas where there still can be challengers within striking distance. Again, I will point to those eighty-seven  districts in 2012 where the margin of victory was between 10 and twenty percent [10-20%], and the Republicans had a very strong advantage - but frankly, you know what? Nothing is guaranteed. We have a volatile electorate, volatile politics, and with the right issues expressed (and I think they're economic, primarily), things can change.
Rob Kall: It looks like there's this immigration reform in the Senate happening. Is that legit, or are they just trying to put the Republicans in a position where they're forced to show their true colors?
Dennis Kucinich: Well there has to be a path towards legalization. I don't think it's about true colors as much as it's about the reality of where we are in America today. About how people who have come from other countries - in many cases we're talking about people who've come over the border from Mexico or Central America -- they're part of the economy, and their children are here. This is why the DREAM Act was important. But what we need to do is look at a broad area of immigration, and understand that we should not have policies that split families, we should have policies that get people back to legalization. This has been true for many years. Republicans are very aware that there is a massive constituency of immigrants, notably Spanish-speaking people, who are not going to be denied, and who do not want to be discriminated against, or their family members discriminated against. So, I think we're actually going to see some changes in immigration policy. How that's going to work out of the Senate, I can't predict, but I think we are headed in that direction. There are demographic realities there, political realities, economic realities, and I think the politics and the legal framework is going to have to catch up with those realities.
Rob Kall: You know, it's not just the Latino community that voted Democratic in the last election, it was Asians, and Islamists; it was amazing how many different demographic groups went seventy percent [70%] or more for Obama. Where do the Progressives fit into that equation? Is this about Obama, who is certainly not Progressive? How do you see the future of Progressives, to the left of the Democrats frankly, I think -- where do you stand?
Dennis Kucinich: Well first, Progressives -- first of all, you made a characterization there that ought to be looked at. You said "To the left of the Democrats." It's presumed by some, that, because you're a Democrat, you're a Liberal, you're "Left"; the Democratic party hasn't necessarily moved in that direction, all the way back to Jimmy Carter - you can go forty  years here. But we have the potential to do that, because we have a constituency that will promote full employment, that will stand by those who want a single-payer Healthcare System, that will stand up for people who want peace, and so here is the challenge for the Democratic Party: it has to refashion itself. Not in the image in whoever the current President is, as happened with President Clinton and trade, as has happened with President Obama and international policy. But, the Democratic Party has to realign itself to the practical aspirations of the American People: for jobs, for healthcare, for Education, for retirement security, for peace, for a clean environment and protecting the environment.
And if we do that, we can regain the support of people at the district level. And if we fail to do that (and frankly, I think that it's not a shocking statement to say that people have lost confidence in both parties to deliver), there's an opening in American politics. The opening relates to a kind of economics that'll rebuild America; that'll put millions of people back to work, that'll enable people to have the dream of housing again, where they may have lost it; that will help small businesses; that will make education a top priority, higher education a top priority, as well as funding elementary and secondary education. The American people, we have this binary choice, Democrat or Republican. But, if the parties do not produce, if this system doesn't work (it breaks down), people will start to look outside for other options; and they should!
Rob Kall: Well, frankly, my readers at Opednews, I'd say maybe forty percent [40%] of them are Democrats; the rest of them are Independents, and I'd say to the left of Democrats, and that's getting easier and easier. Look, they threw you out! You, you... I don't know -- I guess it's that - Ohio did it, but it's not just you. Gradually, the Progressives in Congress are disappearing. Or maybe I'm wrong. Am I?
Dennis Kucinich: (emphatically) No, you're not wrong. Actually, membership in the Progressive Caucus does not necessarily mean a member is Progressive. It means that they want to check that box off on their resume politically. But it doesn't necessarily mean that their votes are going to be aligned with the aspirations of people who identify themselves with Progressives across the country. And so, It also means that people have to look at how individuals vote, and where they stand, and where they would take the country.
One of the problems, Rob, that I see today is our politics is so heavily polarized. You can take an position on an issue, you can disagree with someone. That's fine. But the polarization is causing people not to listen to each other. There's almost automatic responses. There's a lack of communication. And we're losing the ability to unify the country as a result, and that really concerns me; because the underlying strength of America is to express the unity that was implicit in our founding, in the naming of the United States. And it wasn't just about the unity of geographical territories, it's about the unity of people.